Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 262

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The photoreversible fluorescent protein iLOV outperforms GFP as a reporter of plant virus infection

Open access
Chapman, Sean, Faulkner, Christine, Kaiserli, Eirini, Garcia-Mata, Carlos, Savenkov, Eugene I., Roberts, Alison G., Oparka, Karl J., Christie, John M.·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Fluorescent proteins (FPs) based on green fluorescent protein (GFP) are widely used throughout cell biology to study protein dynamics, and have extensive use as reporters of virus infection and spread. However, FP-tagging of viruses is limited by the constraints of viral genome size resulting in FP loss through recombination events. To overcome this, we have engineered a smaller (≈10 kDa) flavin-based alternative to GFP (≈25 kDa) derived from the light, oxygen or voltage-sensing (LOV) domain of the plant blue light receptor, phototropin. Molecular evolution and Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV)-based expression screening produced LOV variants with improved fluorescence and photostability in planta. One variant in particular, designated iLOV, possessed photophysical properties that made it ideally suited as a reporter of subcellular protein localization in both plant and mammalian cells. Moreover, iLOV fluorescence was found to recover spontaneously after photobleaching and displayed an intrinsic photochemistry conferring advantages over GFP-based FPs. When expressed either as a cytosolic protein or as a viral protein fusion, iLOV functioned as a superior reporter to GFP for monitoring local and systemic infections of plant RNA viruses. iLOV, therefore, offers greater utility in FP-tagging of viral gene products and represents a viable alternative where functional protein expression is limited by steric constraints or genome size.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0807551105

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 262

Metadata

Authors
Chapman, S., Faulkner, C., Kaiserli, E., Garcia-Mata, C., Savenkov, E. I., Roberts, A. G., Oparka, K. J., & Christie, J. M.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-12-16
Volume
105
Issue
50
Pages
20038-20043
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2020065174
Cited by
262
References
1
FWCI
4.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The photoreversible fluorescent protein iLOV outperforms GFP as a reporter of plant virus infection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0807551105
The paper
Chapman, S., Faulkner, C., Kaiserli, E., Garcia-Mata, C., Savenkov, E. I., Roberts, A. G., Oparka, K. J., & Christie, J. M. (2008). The photoreversible fluorescent protein iLOV outperforms GFP as a reporter of plant virus infection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0807551105

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.